feishu_task_subtask

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool operates '以用户身份' (as user identity), which hints at authentication context, but doesn't specify required permissions, rate limits, error behaviors, or whether operations are idempotent. For a tool with both create and list actions (potentially involving mutations), this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is reasonably concise with two sentences that cover purpose and usage. The structure is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the inclusion of 'Actions: create, list' feels redundant since these are already defined in the schema's enum, and the description could be more efficiently worded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters with nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain return formats for list actions, error conditions, pagination behavior (though page_size/page_token are in schema), or how the two actions differ in parameter requirements. For a multi-action tool with rich input schema, more contextual information is needed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 67%, with 9 parameters. The description mentions the two actions (create, list) which correspond to the 'action' parameter, but doesn't explain how other parameters relate to these actions (e.g., which parameters are required for create vs list). It adds minimal value beyond what the schema already documents through parameter descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose as '飞书任务的子任务管理工具' (Feishu task subtask management tool) and specifies two actions: create subtasks and list subtasks. It distinguishes this from other task-related tools like feishu_task_task by focusing specifically on subtasks. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all sibling tools beyond the task domain.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides some usage context with '当用户要求创建子任务、查询任务的子任务列表时使用' (use when user requests to create subtasks or query task subtask lists), which implies when to use this tool. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when NOT to use it or mention alternatives among the many sibling tools (like feishu_task_task for main tasks). The guidance is present but incomplete.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.